Nasal Swab Sampling for SARS-CoV-2: a Convenient Alternative in Times of Nasopharyngeal Swab Shortage

Péré, Hélène; Podglajen, Isabelle; Wack, Maxime; Flamarion, Edouard; Mirault, Tristan; Goudot, Guillaume; Hauw‐Berlemont, Caroline; Lê, Laetitia Minh Maï; Caudron, Éric; Carrabin, Sophie; Rodary, Julien; Ribeyre, Tatiana; Bélec, Laurent; Veyer, David

doi:10.1128/jcm.00721-20

Cited by 143 publications

(155 citation statements)

References 3 publications

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

145

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CDC proposes the superiority of PCR testing in the first week after infection because it takes 1-3 weeks for the body to make antibodies and after that period, serologic tests are preferred (23)(24)(25)(26). Therefore, a combination of PCR and serologic tests are the best laboratory diagnostic approach to detection of COVID-19 (27)(28)(29). Special attention should be paid to the clinical course and the radiological examination of all suspected cases as soon as possible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of patient-collected and lab technician-collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detection of COVID-19 by RT-PCR

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scan to discover online Background & Objective: A simple approach to prevent close contact in healthcare settings during the COVID-19 outbreak is to train patients to collect their own nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs and deliver them to medical laboratories to have them processed. The aim of our study was to compare lab technician-with patientcollected oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal samples for detection of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID 19) using rapid real-time polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Methods: Fifty adult patients with flu-like symptoms and radiologic findings compatible with atypical pneumonia who were admitted to the infectious diseases ward of Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran, Iran, with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 from February 28 to April 27 of 2020 were randomly selected and entered in our study. Two sets of naso-and oropharyngeal swabs were collected, one set by a lab technician and the other by the patients, and the COVID-19 rRT-PCR test was performed. Results: Of 50 selected cases, in seven patients all collected naso-and oropharyngeal swabs tested positive, and in 22 patients all samples tested negative for COVID-19 in rRT-PCR. Discrepancies between rRT-PCR results of lab technician-and patientcollected swabs were observed in 12 nasopharyngeal and 13 oropharyngeal specimens. Positive lab technician-collected and negative patient-collected samples were observed in 10 and 5 nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal specimens, respectively. Negative lab technician-collected and positive patient-collected samples were observed in two and seven nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal specimens, respectively. The overall percentage of agreement among both nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs taken by a lab technician and patients was 76% with a kappa value of 0.49 (P=0.001). Conclusion: Based on our findings, lab technician-collected naso-and oropharyngeal swabs cannot be replaced by patient-collected ones with regard to COVID-19 rRT-PCR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of patient-collected and lab technician-collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detection of COVID-19 by RT-PCR

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[6] Nasal sampling was proposed as an alternative to nasopharyngeal sampling, though appears to be inferior to nasopharyngeal sampling (9.1% false negatives). [5] Oropharyngeal (OP) sampling is less sensitive (compared both to nasopharyngeal and nasal sampling) according to several studies. Wang X. et al (2020) and Wang W. et al (2020) reported a positivity rate of OP sampling of 27% and 32% respectively in COVID-19 patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Speci city was found not to be relevant since not one false positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR-result was found in this trial period, in line with literature. [5] Due to the nature of this trial, assessing sensitivity without a negative control group, a calculation of the weighted kappa coe cient was not relevant. All analyses were performed using IMB® SPSS® Statistics version…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1,2] Nasopharyngeal (NP) swab remains the reference sampling method, while recent studies suggest that nasal swab and saliva sampling may be nearly equivalent. [3][4][5][6] The detection of SARS-CoV-2 in oropharyngeal swabs seems less sensitive. [7][8][9][10][11][12] In order to address a pandemic, extensive mapping and therefore broad testing with an easy and comfortable sampling method is of utmost importance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Combined Oropharyngeal/Nasal Swab is Equivalent to Nasopharyngeal Sampling for SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic PCR

Desmet

Paepe

Boelens

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Early 2020, the COVID-19 epidemic became a public health emergency of international concern. To address this pandemic broad testing with an easy, comfortable and reliable testing method is of utmost concern. Nasopharyngeal (NP) swab sampling is the reference method though hampered by international supply shortages. A new oropharyngeal/nasal (OP/N) sampling method was investigated using the more readily available throat swab.Methods: In this prospective observational study 36 COVID-19 patients were tested with both a NP and combined OP/N swab for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR. In hospitalized suspect patients, who tested negative on both swabs, extensive retesting was performed. The sensitivity of NP versus combined OP/N swab sampling on admission and the correlation between viral RNA loads recovered was investigated.Results: 35 patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 by means of either NP or OP/N sampling. The paired swabs were both positive in 31 patients. The one patient who tested negative on both NP and OP/N swab on admission, was ultimately diagnosed on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. A strong correlation was found between the viral RNA loads of the paired swabs (r = 0.76; P < 0.05). The sensitivity of NP and OP/N analysis in hospitalized patients (n = 28) was 89.3% and 92.7% respectively.Conclusions: This study demonstrates equivalence of NP and OP/N sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by means of rRT-PCR. Sensitivity of both NP and OP/N sampling is very high in hospitalized patients.

show abstract

“…Health facilities & laboratories began to follow testing criteria on suspected coronavirus disease (COVID-19) cases and implement molecular testing of RT-qPCR (Real Time polymerase chain reaction) for diagnosis of the respiratory system through nasal swabs as the approved testing methodology for detection of SARS-COV-2 ( Péré et al, 2020 ). Never the less, the presence of SARS-COV-2 (RNA) was also detected in other human specimens such as blood and urine in pre-symptomatic, asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals ( Petersen et al, 2020 ; Woelfel et al, 2020 ; Zhang et al, 2020 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

First confirmed detection of SARS-COV-2 in untreated municipal and aircraft wastewater in Dubai, UAE: The use of wastewater based epidemiology as an early warning tool to monitor the prevalence of COVID-19

Albastaki¹,

Naji²,

Lootah³

et al. 2021

Science of The Total Environment

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome – Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in Wuhan, China and spread to more than 114 countries resulting in a pandemic, which was declared by the WHO in March 2020. Tracking the spread of the virus raised a main concern in every country. Many researches proved the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in stool samples of patients, where the genes of this virus gave a positive signal several days prior to the occurrence of symptoms. The fact of viral shedding in stools provides an advantage in utilizing wastewater systems as a tool to monitor the viral prevalence. We tested more than 2900 municipal wastewater samples coming from 49 distinctive area in Dubai, where 28.6% showed positive results. We also looked into the wastewater samples from 198 commercial aircrafts arriving at Dubai Airport, giving a positive result percentage of 13.6%. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 genes was confirmed using TaqPath™ Covid-19 RT-PCR kit, which targets ORF1ab , N gene and S gene. This project shows the significance of utilizing wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) in monitoring the prevalence of various infectious diseases such as SARS-CoV-2, which can assist the decision makers to determine the level of precautionary measures according to the areas of the outbreak. With this in mind, pricewise, WBE is considered cost-effective when comparing to clinical nasal swabs.

show abstract

Nasal Swab Sampling for SARS-CoV-2: a Convenient Alternative in Times of Nasopharyngeal Swab Shortage

Cited by 143 publications

References 3 publications

Comparison of patient-collected and lab technician-collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detection of COVID-19 by RT-PCR

Comparison of patient-collected and lab technician-collected nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs for detection of COVID-19 by RT-PCR

Combined Oropharyngeal/Nasal Swab is Equivalent to Nasopharyngeal Sampling for SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic PCR

First confirmed detection of SARS-COV-2 in untreated municipal and aircraft wastewater in Dubai, UAE: The use of wastewater based epidemiology as an early warning tool to monitor the prevalence of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About